You may have noticed over the past week that there's a big hoo-hah about a proposal from the Lord Chancellor that juries could be abolished for complex fraud trials.

Now, I have to say that I'm a fully paid-up democrat and a firm believer in the rights of man. But in this case, I'm not all that worried. The sheer mind-boggling nature of international trade laws and financial instruments like derivatives baffles me (and, I suspect, 99pc of the population).

If these fraud cases end up being decided by judges aided by skilled assessors, then that's fine by me.

But there has to be a recompense for the loss of the jury in these cases, and I have a suggestion for Lord Falconer, which could even out this imbalance, and might also make this world fairer for a lot of people.

I am referring to people facing a local magistrates' court, particularly women.

Most of the people in front of the beak are there for what are called 'petty' crimes, and many accused of such crimes are women.

Petty crimes mean offences like shoplifting, or working and signing on. These are the kind of crimes often committed by women, and in particular, poor and vulnerable women. And what is simply frightening is how many women in this position end up in prison on the order of a magistrate.

I'm not saying people convicted of such crimes shouldn't be punished. They should. But the punishment should fit the crime. And prison doesn't fit these crimes - period.

Consider these figures. In 2003, the last year for which figures are available, 5,701 women were sent to the slammer by the magistrates, as against 3,109 by a Crown Court, where the verdict was determined by a judge and jury.

Put simply, prison affects women far more harshly that your average male ne'er-do-well. Many convicted women are mums. A lot are single mums - a child's sole carer.

The numbers of children snatched from their mums by imprisonment is large - in recent years it is estimated that 17,000 kids lost their mum to the cell block.

The impact of such forcible separation is frightening. Can we - can you - imagine having your mum snatched from you, and then having to adjust to life in a foster home or a council children's institution? I can't.

And it gets worse. Most women prisoners aren't home owners but tenants, and in consequence end up losing their house as well as their liberty. Even when they finally walk back out of the gates, most landlords or housing associations don't rush to house ex-offenders. And a homeless woman is not someone who will easily get her child back from the social services.

So there we have it. A woman, often a frightened and vulnerable and cowed woman, is sent down for a minor offence on the whim of a magistrate. And as a result, lives are wrecked.

So let the juries off white-collar fraud cases, and turn them loose in our magistrates' courts, where they might end up doing a real power of good.